• Please be aware we've switched the forums to their own URL. (again) You'll find the new website address to be www.steelernationforum.com Thanks
  • Please clear your private messages. Your inbox is close to being full.

Golson and Blake impressing Antonio Brown

Looking at our depth chart though Cortez Allen better bounce back or Josh Gordon is going to eat Golson and Blakes lunch and then roll a blunt afterwards with them.

not this year. I guarandamntee that Josh Gordon will not even catch a single pass against us in either game.
 
I don't like all the Gay/Blake praise. It makes me think that Cortez hasn't gotten his head out of his *** yet. Boy will I be pissed if he regresses this training camp. He's got the talent and can make plays. The only thing holding him back is between the ears.
 
From last year's backup DBs, I liked McCain's play over Blake's. By a nose, because their play was similar... but McCain's gone, so hopefully Blake elevates his game.
 
Anyone hear anything about Cortez from OTAs?

There was an interview with him and he commented on getting back to the fundamentals in a big way, he further said that he had gotten away from that and it had caused problems. Those are not his exact words but that is the gist of his interview and that he has been working hard on getting his game to where it should be.
 
Team Stream
BLEACHER REPORT INC.
FreeINSTALL

Pittsburgh Steelers Who've Turned Heads in Offseason Workouts
CB Antwon Blake

« PREV5 of 7NEXT »
Keith Srakocic/Associated Press
At first, it seemed like the Steelers made a mistake by letting free-agent cornerback Brice McCain leave for the Miami Dolphins and instead opting to retain fellow free agent Antwon Blake. But so far in OTAs, Blake is making a convincing argument for why the Steelers chose to keep him around.

The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review's Mark Kaboly reports that Blake has been working as an outside cornerback in the team's nickel package, with William Gay moving inside to the slot. He covered receivers Antonio Brown and Martavis Bryant in those situations and handled the two talented receivers well. Though just 5'9", Kaboly noted that Blake "more often than not" beat out Bryant and Brown in the end zone.

Blake totaled 42 tackles, six passes defensed and an interception in 2014. This year, the Steelers expect more from Blake, given that they have already moved him around the defense in OTAs.

Blake expects much from himself as well, saying to Kaboly, "In this profession, it's all about coming out and taking it one day at a time and proving yourself every day. ... I always knew I can do it. There is a difference of knowing you can do and doing it."

Now, it appears Blake will be going from relative obscurity to a starting fixture in Pittsburgh's secondary.
 
Sometimes I wonder if our coaching/talent evaluation is myopic.

Players like Golson (5085) and Blake (5092) are naturally going to match up better against a player of Antonio Brown's size and quickness. If every player we faced this year was 5'-10" and 185-190 lbs., I have no issue with players of Golson and Blake size/ability.

I'm sure those two guys are looking decent against Wheaton as well.

I worry that some of the reasons we've been hearing about how good Bryant and Coates have looked so far is because those are the exact types of players I have worries we can't cover or deal with in our secondary. And Bryant and Coates aren't nearly going to be the toughest matchups for this team to deal with.

I just worry Tomlin and Co. are basing so much talent evaluation on practice that they fail to realize the general matchup issues created by the roster. It's like if you practice against a bad defense and your offense looks good, then come game day your offense looks bad, the coach can't say "We didn't execute like we did in practice" as an excuse.

I think Tomlin and this coaching sometimes talk themselves into players' ability based only on practice and internal matchups and not on trying to project where the best matchups will be on game days and how to take advantage of size/skill in game situations.

This all comes down to self-evaluation, which I have never thought Tomlin and/or Colbert do a good enough job on.

Seems like a whole lot of defenders both big and small didn't match up too well against Brown on game day.
 
see, this is where you know nothing. a coach like harbaugh could trot out the hot dog vendor and get 2-3 interceptions per quarter.

Well if he didn't get them he sure as hell would be whining about it
 
Sometimes I wonder if our coaching/talent evaluation is myopic.

Players like Golson (5085) and Blake (5092) are naturally going to match up better against a player of Antonio Brown's size and quickness. If every player we faced this year was 5'-10" and 185-190 lbs., I have no issue with players of Golson and Blake size/ability.

I'm sure those two guys are looking decent against Wheaton as well.

I worry that some of the reasons we've been hearing about how good Bryant and Coates have looked so far is because those are the exact types of players I have worries we can't cover or deal with in our secondary. And Bryant and Coates aren't nearly going to be the toughest matchups for this team to deal with.

I just worry Tomlin and Co. are basing so much talent evaluation on practice that they fail to realize the general matchup issues created by the roster. It's like if you practice against a bad defense and your offense looks good, then come game day your offense looks bad, the coach can't say "We didn't execute like we did in practice" as an excuse.

I think Tomlin and this coaching sometimes talk themselves into players' ability based only on practice and internal matchups and not on trying to project where the best matchups will be on game days and how to take advantage of size/skill in game situations.

This all comes down to self-evaluation, which I have never thought Tomlin and/or Colbert do a good enough job on.

So where do scouts come into play? Just curious on your opinion. Is our drafting just Tombert or is there more to it than that?
 
With scouting I think you simply don't get everything you want. I see the FO targeted athletic players that have a lot of room for growth (high ceiling).

At the same time trying to get players who can have the potential to make plays on the ball. Something the Steelers secondary has been sorely missing. INTs.


In this draft what was there really? I looked over production and those taller corners had few and far between. There might have been better cover corners available here and there. But within the zone scheme andddddd combining with that making plays on the ball. There was very few that stood out.


Steelers managed to coral three that showed that ability two corners and a safety.

Allen showed that ability before his play drop off. So he isn't a lost cause yet.

And probably a better tall receiver match up a few are desiring. But his play has to improve, his consistency to stay on the field.

I think he can do it but his mindset has to be right.

But back to the players drafted, you can hope for a trifecta height/ball skills/range for a corner.

But I think Meatloaf says it best with, two out of three ain't bad.
 
Plaxico was routinly shut down by the likes of Hank Poteat and Asanta Samuel.
 
So where do scouts come into play? Just curious on your opinion. Is our drafting just Tombert or is there more to it than that?

I don't think the scouts "stack" the board. Maybe they sell a guy during a sit down meeting with Tombert about the board, but it's ultimately Tombert that is stacking the board and putting a player like Golson ahead of a player like P.J. Williams. Or a player like Archer ahead of Bryant.

Remember, a big board for a specific team is a lot more about elimination than selection. They have so much more information than just the game tapes. Rumors around school, psyche evaluation, interview, et. al. The more information, the more possibilities Tombert says "I don't like that about the guy" and down he falls on the board.

My impression of both Archer and Golson is that both excel with the intangibles Tomlin likes. Kind of the "small kid on the block" that has to stand up to the big guys his whole life. The underdogs. Great work ethic. Won't back down from a fight. Spence was undersized. Same type of character. Antonio Brown was the same way (but at least he was a 6th rounder).

And it's not just the small guys. We've seen it time and again under the Tombert regime they seem to get fixated on certain prospects that they "fall in love with". It's part of the reason for the quick triggers on turning in the card. They know what they want and nothing that happens on draft day is changing their mind.

To me ever since Tomlin arrived there's been a lot more emotion involved with our draft choices. Tomlin doesn't seem logical or cool-headed in his draft thought process. I worry he talks up prospects in his brain during the process. Finds a guy he likes and over-inflates their actual value. Especially on the defensive side of the ball.

One of the reasons I like to keep coaches coach and GM's manage is just because of that scout process errors that occurs if you start to think too much about how great it would be to coach a guy rather than think whether the guys has the skills to succeed. Coaching up guys you don't like is part of what makes a good coach. Coaching guys you like is easy.

But at this level, talent still rules the roost. Not coachability.
 
I don't think the scouts "stack" the board. Maybe they sell a guy during a sit down meeting with Tombert about the board, but it's ultimately Tombert that is stacking the board and putting a player like Golson ahead of a player like P.J. Williams. Or a player like Archer ahead of Bryant.

Remember, a big board for a specific team is a lot more about elimination than selection. They have so much more information than just the game tapes. Rumors around school, psyche evaluation, interview, et. al. The more information, the more possibilities Tombert says "I don't like that about the guy" and down he falls on the board.

My impression of both Archer and Golson is that both excel with the intangibles Tomlin likes. Kind of the "small kid on the block" that has to stand up to the big guys his whole life. The underdogs. Great work ethic. Won't back down from a fight. Spence was undersized. Same type of character. Antonio Brown was the same way (but at least he was a 6th rounder).

And it's not just the small guys. We've seen it time and again under the Tombert regime they seem to get fixated on certain prospects that they "fall in love with". It's part of the reason for the quick triggers on turning in the card. They know what they want and nothing that happens on draft day is changing their mind.

To me ever since Tomlin arrived there's been a lot more emotion involved with our draft choices. Tomlin doesn't seem logical or cool-headed in his draft thought process. I worry he talks up prospects in his brain during the process. Finds a guy he likes and over-inflates their actual value. Especially on the defensive side of the ball.

One of the reasons I like to keep coaches coach and GM's manage is just because of that scout process errors that occurs if you start to think too much about how great it would be to coach a guy rather than think whether the guys has the skills to succeed. Coaching up guys you don't like is part of what makes a good coach. Coaching guys you like is easy.

But at this level, talent still rules the roost. Not coachability.

Thanks for your reply.
 
I think Cortez Allen will step up to the plate. It's a long time between back then and up coming NOW. Fundamentals, key in any sport. He has had time to get things ironed out some, both mentally and physicaly. We need him and it's a good thing who we drafted as all of them will push each other more and more.


Salute the nation
 
It wasn't just Tombert that had PJ rated lower. 2 other CB (I think) were picked after Golson and before PJ. ONE from a small school.

Athe pick 90 and after (fairly close to the Archer pick) 5 WR were taken before Bryant. And we STILL got Bryant.

The NFL.Com draft analysis of Bryant and Archer had them slotted 4/5 and 3/4, respectively. Exactly where they went. I doubt Tombert and the nfl.Com analyst were the only two/three peoe to do so. So, right or wrong, it ain't just Tombert who had Archer rated, at least, as well as Bryant. You know, the guy we still got. 21 picks later.
 
I think Cortez Allen will step up to the plate. It's a long time between back then and up coming NOW. Fundamentals, key in any sport. He has had time to get things ironed out some, both mentally and physicaly. We need him and it's a good thing who we drafted as all of them will push each other more and more.


Salute the nation

I hope he does. Seems, to me, if he has been showing something, it would be all over the write ups. Leaves me to believe 1) he is still hurt and not taking part in OTAs much or 2) he is taking part, but not showing much.

1 is less troubling than 2. For 1, he has some time to get healed up. For 2, hes had time to fix that ****.
 
I hope he does. Seems, to me, if he has been showing something, it would be all over the write ups. Leaves me to believe 1) he is still hurt and not taking part in OTAs much or 2) he is taking part, but not showing much.

1 is less troubling than 2. For 1, he has some time to get healed up. For 2, hes had time to fix that ****.

Another way to look at it is that if he was back there getting burned or looking like, he had never played the position before, the media would be sure to let us know about THAT too. As bad as he was last year, if anyone is expecting Allen to come out of the gate looking like the second coming Rod Woodson, I would expect that they will be sadly disappointed. That kid's head was so messed up last year that if they can get average or just solid CB play out of him this year Carnell Lake should get the award for assistant coach of the year.
 
Another way to look at it is that if he was back there getting burned or looking like, he had never played the position before, the media would be sure to let us know about THAT too.

I guess I hadn't thought of it that way. Just seems weird that there is nothing being reported. Maybe, 1 is the more likely.
 
I guess I hadn't thought of it that way. Just seems weird that there is nothing being reported. Maybe, 1 is the more likely.

He was interviewed and talked about getting back to fundamentals. Lake was interviewed and also talked about him getting back to playing the position but he did say he can't play it for him. I would guess there is just not much to report from football in shorts one way or the other. One of the guys from the steelers organization did say that some guys can remove themselves from the teams plans based on what they do in Mini camp and OTA's and so far he has not done that. According to this guy who was being interviewed by Labs they look at film after everyone of these sessions and guys that can't seem to get into the playbook or in shape etc. can be cut loose early and a replacement brought in. I suspect that is why we might see guys released very early in the process.
 
He was interviewed and talked about getting back to fundamentals. Lake was interviewed and also talked about him getting back to playing the position but he did say he can't play it for him. I would guess there is just not much to report from football in shorts one way or the other. One of the guys from the steelers organization did say that some guys can remove themselves from the teams plans based on what they do in Mini camp and OTA's and so far he has not done that. According to this guy who was being interviewed by Labs they look at film after everyone of these sessions and guys that can't seem to get into the playbook or in shape etc. can be cut loose early and a replacement brought in. I suspect that is why we might see guys released very early in the process.

Thanks, just looked and saw the Steelerdepot and Bleacherreport articles saying these things. I expected the bleacherreport story to be more of a "rah rah" story. Kind of bland.
 
Thanks, just looked and saw the Steelerdepot and Bleacherreport articles saying these things. I expected the bleacherreport story to be more of a "rah rah" story. Kind of bland.

Your welcome.
 
Top